Philo of Alexandria - Books and Journals

358 part two
20543. C. Lévy, ‘Deux problèmes doxographiques chez Philon d’Alexandrie:
Posidonius et Enésidème,’ in A. Brancacci (ed.), Philosophy and
Doxography in the Imperial Age, Accademia Toscana di Scienze e Lettere
«La Colombaria» Studi 228 (Florence 2005) 79–102.
Without doubt Philo is a major source of the study of philosophical doxography,
but little use has been made of his evidence, partly because historians
of philosophy have shown little interest in him, partly because his writings are
rather inaccessible. The author does not wish to focus on Aet., because it cannot
be considered characteristic of the problems posed by the study of doxography
in Philo (and its authenticity is still not wholly beyond dispute). Instead
he prefers to analyse two other examples. The first concerns the passions of the
soul and focuses on the texts Leg. 2.99, Agr. 14, Congr.81andLeg. 3.116. These
texts reveal that Philo does not consider the various passions to be on an equal
footing, but regards pleasure as the foundation for the other three. There would
appear to be a connection with Posidonius, but it would be wrong to claim that
Philo’s view of Stoicism was wholly determined by that thinker. Philo respects
Stoicism for the way it gives expression to ethical perfection, but is critical of its
doctrine of immanence. The second example discussed at greater length relates
to the sceptical tropes in Ebr. 167–202. Much has been written on this passage,
and in particular on its relation to the other sources Sextus Empiricus and Diogenes
Laertius. Lévy points out that differences between them could be not just
a matter of style or the use of a different source. It is also possible that they point
to the incompatibility of the sceptical arguments with Philo’s philosophical and
religious convictions. He points to at least two interventions on the part of Philo,
the omission of the argument that human beings are not truly superior to animals,
and the omission of the example of mythology. It is also noted that in Philo’s
day the tropes may not have had the same fixed form and number that they later
acquired. Lévy determines that in Philo only eight of the ten tropes found in Sextus
can be identified. He concludes the article by arguing that Philo’s evidence
in doxographical matters shows that he is ‘infinitely better informed about the
history and current state of philosophy’ than has often been thought (p. 102). He
is also interesting because he is not a professional and so gives evidence of the
movement of doctrines from the philosophical schools to the cultured public.
(DTR)
20544.R.Liong-SengPhua,Idolatry and Authority. A Study of 1 Corinthians
8.1–11.1 in the Light of the Jewish Diaspora, LibraryofNew
Testament Studies 299 (London 2005), esp. 57–68.
In this study on idolatry in 1Cor 8:1–11:1, the author discusses the issue
of idolatry in some Diaspora Jewish works in Chapter 3. Works and authors
discussed are: Wisdom of Solomon 11–13; Philo; Josephus, Joseph and Asenath;
and the Sibylline Oracles (pp. 50–89). More specifically in his section on Philo
(pp. 57–68), he deals with the issue of idolatry in texts such as Opif. 170–172;
Decal. 52–81; Spec. 1.12–31; Contempl. 3–8 and some aspects of Legat. The